ReviewBirth defects research2022
Conjoined twins and conjoined triplets: At the heart of the matter.
Review in Birth defects research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- When Teratology and Augmented Reality Entwine: A Qualitative Phenomenological Analysis in a Museal Setting.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Description of a monstrous little girl born in the Verona area on June 14, 1789.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2025Article
- Developmental origin and clinical profile of siamese twins in a tertiary care setting.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Phenotypically Discordant Anomalies in Conjoined Twins: Quirks of Nature Governed by Molecular Pathways?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Epigastric heteropagus conjoined twins combined with TRAP sequence.BMJ case reports · 2023Article
- The role of the University of Padua medical school in the study of conjoined twins between 18th and early 19th century.American journal of medical genetics. Part A · 2022Article
- Conjoined twins and conjoined triplets: At the heart of the matter.Birth defects research · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Conjoined triplets are among the rarest of human malformations, as are asymmetric or parasitic conjoined twins. Based on a very modest corpus of recent literature, we applied the embryonic disk model of conjoined twinning to 10 previously reported cases involving asymmetric anatomical multiplications to determine whether they concerned conjoined twins or conjoined triplets. In spite of their phenotypic similarities, we diagnosed four of these cases as conjoined twins and three of them as conjoined triplets. In the remaining three cases, no definite diagnosis could be made, as essential information was lacking from the reports. We conclude that it is not necessarily the expected duplication or triplication of structures that points to the correct diagnosis in these cases, but the number and mutual position of the hearts they presented with. Considering their rarity we stress to thoroughly investigate and describe internal (dys)morphology in novel cases of (asymmetric) conjoined twins and triplets to further unravel their pathogenicity and come to the correct diagnoses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.